4 ms·

Do you want to feel better about the climate? Or actually fix it? I'd rather have a cold hard doctor that fixes my cancer, than feel good about dying.

damnyou 7y ago
Why are you presenting a false dichotomy?
- RobertRoberts 7y ago
  A false dichotomy is when two opposing views are expressed as the only options. I am comparing a real solution (science) with a phony one (emotions). Can a warm fuzzy doctor cure cancer with science? Yes. Can a warm fuzzy doctor cure cancer with emotions and no science? No. So, this is not a false dichotomy. The climate can not be changed by feeling different about it. Is there a solution to climate change that does not involve science? I would argue no.
  - IanCal 7y ago
    You put up a false dichotomy because none of us are saying it's a choice between emotions and science. What they're talking about is how important emotions are when dealing with humans, and you need to deal with humans to solve this problem.
    - RobertRoberts 7y ago
      The climate issue would end tomorrow if the government made it illegal and started arresting people. So it's not a problem with the people. It's a childish ploy to play with emotions, and you will end up with a childish solution playing this game. Science has won over millions of people with the truth time and time again. To pretend like this issue can only be solved by emotions is a giant lie. We have history to demonstrate this.
      - IanCal 7y ago
        > The climate issue would end tomorrow if the government made it illegal and started arresting people. So it's not a problem with the people. If the government made all CO2 emissions illegal tomorrow people wouldn't be able to go to work or feed their families, you'd have massive riots and the government would either change their minds or be thrown out. > To pretend like this issue can only be solved by emotions is a giant lie. Yet again, absolutely nobody is saying this.
        RobertRoberts 7y ago
        Yes, the economy would be impacted, but the problem of the climate would be solved. A real solution. Why not start there and work backwards towards a solution that will be acceptable? How would people feel about saving the entire human race? Maybe that's the problem, it's "feelings", not real solutions. > Yet again, absolutely nobody is saying this. They actually are, it's just subtle so maybe you aren't noticing it. There's an attempted shift in the discussion away from very, very real solutions to emotional manipulation.
  - damnyou 7y ago
    There's no solution to climate change that does not involve science. However, there's no solution to climate science that doesn't involve engaging with humans either. Pathos is a fundamental part of engaging with humans.
throwaway5752 7y ago
I would like to have a cold hard oncologist, a therapist, and hospice care in that situation, personally.
kernelPan1c 7y ago
Agreed, this is a problem that we will solve through scientific innovation in power generation (nuclear) and carbon sequestration. The solutions that fall in the emotional domain often involve legislation and a reduction in quality of life.
trehalose 7y ago
There is a large body of evidence that a warm soft doctor is more likely to actually try and succeed to fix your cancer than a cold hard doctor. https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/should_we_train_doctors_for_empathy https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/should_we_trai... https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wps.20146 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wps.20146 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00457/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnbeh.2014.0045... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21300514 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21300514 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21248604 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21248604
- RobertRoberts 7y ago
  If there is any science that says smiling or telling a joke will alter the climate, I will be the first in line to admit my error. Otherwise, I will argue that emotions are directly linked to our personal health, but not the climate. It's an entirely different system that has no emotions.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - c0nducktr 7y ago
    Fuck man you're so god damn keen on missing the point, aren't you? Nobody's saying the climate has emotions. You're not going to fix anything without convincing people do act, and its more likely that you can convince people to act if you can connect with with on an emotional level, rather than just tell them the facts and saying what needs to be done. We've been telling people the facts for years and it's not done shit.
    - RobertRoberts 7y ago
      I am not missing the point, fixing the climate has nothing to do with emotions of people either. All a politician has to do is present a real solution, and you will have lots of support. That hasn't happened yet. It wasn't hard to get people to stop littering, because the leaders did something about it, and the followers followed. It's a leadership issue, not a follower issue. So stop blaming the followers, and blame the leaders.

damnyou 7y ago

Why are you presenting a false dichotomy?

RobertRoberts 7y ago
A false dichotomy is when two opposing views are expressed as the only options. I am comparing a real solution (science) with a phony one (emotions). Can a warm fuzzy doctor cure cancer with science? Yes. Can a warm fuzzy doctor cure cancer with emotions and no science? No. So, this is not a false dichotomy. The climate can not be changed by feeling different about it. Is there a solution to climate change that does not involve science? I would argue no.
- IanCal 7y ago
  You put up a false dichotomy because none of us are saying it's a choice between emotions and science. What they're talking about is how important emotions are when dealing with humans, and you need to deal with humans to solve this problem.
  - RobertRoberts 7y ago
    The climate issue would end tomorrow if the government made it illegal and started arresting people. So it's not a problem with the people. It's a childish ploy to play with emotions, and you will end up with a childish solution playing this game. Science has won over millions of people with the truth time and time again. To pretend like this issue can only be solved by emotions is a giant lie. We have history to demonstrate this.
    - IanCal 7y ago
      > The climate issue would end tomorrow if the government made it illegal and started arresting people. So it's not a problem with the people. If the government made all CO2 emissions illegal tomorrow people wouldn't be able to go to work or feed their families, you'd have massive riots and the government would either change their minds or be thrown out. > To pretend like this issue can only be solved by emotions is a giant lie. Yet again, absolutely nobody is saying this.
      - RobertRoberts 7y ago
        Yes, the economy would be impacted, but the problem of the climate would be solved. A real solution. Why not start there and work backwards towards a solution that will be acceptable? How would people feel about saving the entire human race? Maybe that's the problem, it's "feelings", not real solutions. > Yet again, absolutely nobody is saying this. They actually are, it's just subtle so maybe you aren't noticing it. There's an attempted shift in the discussion away from very, very real solutions to emotional manipulation.
- damnyou 7y ago
  There's no solution to climate change that does not involve science. However, there's no solution to climate science that doesn't involve engaging with humans either. Pathos is a fundamental part of engaging with humans.

throwaway5752 7y ago

I would like to have a cold hard oncologist, a therapist, and hospice care in that situation, personally.

kernelPan1c 7y ago

Agreed, this is a problem that we will solve through scientific innovation in power generation (nuclear) and carbon sequestration. The solutions that fall in the emotional domain often involve legislation and a reduction in quality of life.

trehalose 7y ago

There is a large body of evidence that a warm soft doctor is more likely to actually try and succeed to fix your cancer than a cold hard doctor. https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/should_we_train_doctors_for_empathy https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/should_we_trai... https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wps.20146 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wps.20146 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00457/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnbeh.2014.0045... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21300514 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21300514 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21248604 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21248604

RobertRoberts 7y ago
If there is any science that says smiling or telling a joke will alter the climate, I will be the first in line to admit my error. Otherwise, I will argue that emotions are directly linked to our personal health, but not the climate. It's an entirely different system that has no emotions.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- c0nducktr 7y ago
  Fuck man you're so god damn keen on missing the point, aren't you? Nobody's saying the climate has emotions. You're not going to fix anything without convincing people do act, and its more likely that you can convince people to act if you can connect with with on an emotional level, rather than just tell them the facts and saying what needs to be done. We've been telling people the facts for years and it's not done shit.
  - RobertRoberts 7y ago
    I am not missing the point, fixing the climate has nothing to do with emotions of people either. All a politician has to do is present a real solution, and you will have lots of support. That hasn't happened yet. It wasn't hard to get people to stop littering, because the leaders did something about it, and the followers followed. It's a leadership issue, not a follower issue. So stop blaming the followers, and blame the leaders.